CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES
UNDER ARTICLE 19 OF THE CONVENTION
Conclusions and recommendations of the Committee against Torture

Monaco

1. The Committee considered the second periodic report of Monaco (CAT/C/38/Add.2)
at its 596th, 599th and 609th meetings (CAT/C/SR.596, 599 and 609), held on
5, 6 and 13 May 2004, and adopted the following conclusions and recommendations.

A. Introduction

2. The Committee welcomes with satisfaction the second periodic report of Monaco,
which is broadly consistent with the Committee's general guidelines. It notes,
however, that the report was submitted five years late and contains little specific
information on how the Convention is being implemented. It is pleased that the
State party sent a high-level delegation which provided clear answers to the
questions put to it and evinced a spirit of frank cooperation.

B. Positive aspects

3. The Committee notes with satisfaction:
(a) The absence of any allegations that the State party has violated the Convention;

(b) The fact that the State party is currently becoming a member of the Council
of Europe;

(c) The reform of the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure to bring
them into line with European human rights standards;

(d) The contributions made every year since 1994 to the United Nations Voluntary
Fund for Victims of Torture.

C. Subjects of concern

4. The Committee expresses concern about:
(a) The lack of a definition of torture in criminal law that covers all the
constituent elements contained in article 1 of the Convention;

(b) The lack of any provision expressly prohibiting the invocation of exceptional
circumstances or orders from a superior officer or a public authority as a justification
for torture;

(c) The weakness of the safeguards associated with the expulsion and return
(refoulement) of foreigners, inasmuch as there appears to be no clause on non-refoulement
in Monaco's domestic law that meets the requirements of article 3 of the Convention
and appeal to the Supreme Court does not automatically have suspensive effect;

(d) The narrow scope of articles 228 and 278 of the Criminal Code, which do
not fully meet the requirements of article 4 of the Convention, since they relate
only to murder committed by means of acts of torture or accompanied by acts
of cruelty and to torture committed in the course of unlawful arrest or abduction;

(e) The fact that persons in custody are not entitled to the assistance of
counsel, there being no provision for such assistance until they first appear
before the investigating magistrate, and can inform their next of kin that they
have been detained only with the magistrate's authorization;

(f) The lack of explicit provisions requiring a register of individuals held
in police premises, even if such registers are actually kept;

(g) The absence of any mechanism to monitor physical prison conditions and
how prisoners are treated in French penitentiary establishments.

D. Recommendations

5. The Committee recommends that the State party:
(a) Establish in its domestic criminal law a definition of torture that is fully
consistent with article 1 of the Convention;

(b) Enact in its domestic law a prohibition on the invocation of exceptional
circumstances or orders received from a superior officer or public authority
as a justification of torture;

(c) Respect the principle laid down in article 3 of the Convention, including
in cases involving the expulsion and return (refoulement) of foreigners, and
establish that appeals against deportation orders which mention the risk of
torture in the country of destination automatically have suspensive effect.
The Committee, noting that individuals are expelled or returned only to France,
reminds the State party that it must satisfy itself that no one will be returned
to a third country where there might be a risk of torture;

(d) Guarantee the right of individuals in detention to have access to a lawyer
of their choosing and inform their next of kin within the first few hours of
being detained;

(e) Adopt regulations requiring the use of registers in police premises in
conformity with the relevant international agreements, particularly the Body
of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention
or Imprisonment;

(f) Monitor physical prison conditions and how prisoners are treated in French
penitentiary establishments;

(g) Consider ratifying the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, whose prevention
objectives are very important.

6. The Committee recommends that the present conclusions and recommendations,
and the summary records of the meetings at which the State party's second periodic
report was considered, should be widely disseminated in the country.

7. The Committee requests the State party to provide within one year information
on the action it has taken on its recommendations contained in paragraph 5 (c),
(d) and (f) above.

8. The Committee, considering that the second periodic report of Monaco also
covers the third report due on 4 January 2001, requests the State party to submit
its fourth and fifth reports in a single document on 4 January 2009.